The Allahabad High Court recently said that a licensed firearm cannot be used for "joy firing" during marriages or religious festivals and that every arms licensee is duty-bound to maintain records of ammunition purchased and its use.

Observing that an arms licence is a 'privilege' subject to strict compliance with statutory conditions, the Court refused to interfere with the cancellation of an arms licence after the licensee failed to account for 757 cartridges allegedly used over the years.

A bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery thus dismissed the writ petition filed by one Akhilesh Kumar challenging the orders of the licensing authority and the appellate authority cancelling his arms licence.

The Court observed thus:

"An arms license being privilege is only issue when petitioner undertakes that strict conditions of license shall be complied with."

Case in brief

An arms licence was issued in favour of the petitioner way back in 2000. In 2019, an inspection was conducted, and details of ammunition (used and unused) were sought.

The petitioner disclosed that he had purchased a total of 857 cartridges; however, he was able to produce only 57 live cartridges and 33 empty cartridges.

As for the remaining 757 cartridges, according to the petitioner, they were used for training, marriage, Chhat Puja, and Durga Puja.

Finding this explanation unsatisfactory and holding that the petitioner had failed to produce any specific record showing how the ammunition had been used, the licensing authority cancelled the licence under Section 17 of the Arms Act.

The appellate authority affirmed the decision. Challenging both the orders, the petitioner moved the High Court

Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that there was no mandatory requirement to preserve used cartridges or to maintain details thereof. The 2018 notification was not applicable when the petitioner was granted an arms licence; therefore, he had not maintained the details.

Court's Observations

The High Court referred to Section 17 of the Arms Act, Rule 112 of the Arms Rules, 2016, the additional licence conditions in Schedule III, and Rule 23 restricting the quantity of ammunition that may be purchased and possessed.

It reiterated that the licensing authority is empowered to verify whether the ammunition remains in the licensee's possession and whether the licence conditions are being complied with.

The Court observed that although the licence had originally been issued in 2000, the applicable conditions formed part of the licence itself and were subsequently 'crystallised' under the Arms Rules, 2016.

Holding that the petitioner had neither maintained records nor disclosed the purpose for which such a large quantity of ammunition had been used, the Court said:

"The petitioner is not allowed to use licensed firearm for purpose of joy firing as in the present case licensed firearm was misused in marriage and religious festivals, therefore, not only the petitioner has failed to submit details of ammunition purchase as well as how number of cartridges was used and purpose of using it".

It further noted that the deficiency of 757 cartridges was itself substantial enough to justify the licensing authority's conclusion that the conditions of the arms licence had been violated.

It added that if such a large quantity had indeed been used in marriages and festivals for joy firing, that by itself established misuse of the licensed firearm.

Therefore, finding no infirmity in the impugned orders, the Court dismissed the writ petition.

Case Title: Akhilesh Kumar vs. State of U.P. and 2 others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 505

Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 505

Click Here To Read/Download Order